2.5 stars. Rounding up because, hey, first book and all that. That said, for an author that considers himself part professional horseman, part professional writer, I hope he'll continue to improve. Given his exhortation for critics to be constructive, and given that others have already noted the disjointed nature of the work, I'll focus on other points:
- So. Much. Booze. If there was a drinking game for every time he mentioned booze, every reader would be wasted. I wasn't clear if this was intended to be a commentary on the horse world's drinking culture, but it was effective regardless. As someone who loves a good beer, I was still a bit shocked by the repeated refrain in a relatively short book. *Lesson:* Perhaps reconsider whether these references are necessary or speak directly to their relevance to the horse sport you encountered.
- The wife comments. Recognizing that portraying one's current romantic partner in a book is hard, I'll just say: she "rations" smiles because they're "candy" to him?? If all I had to go by was this book, it would seem like she's just not that into him. *Lesson:* If it's awkward to write about a spouse, just say so. Be open about the fact that large portions of your relationship are getting edited out. Break the fourth wall.
- Unnecessarily fixated on vague terms. Yes, horsemanship means many things to many people, but there is nothing magical about this word. One could also recognize that its very vagueness makes it potentially useless -- one could just as well ask someone what their philosophy of horse training is, what they consider to be the most important aspect of working with horses, etc. Alternatively, one could take the word apart: horse + man + ship = relationship between horse and man. There is no dedicated exploration of the concept, merely a spasmodic repetition of the question and anodyne comments on respect, partnership, leadership, etc. *Lesson:* If the goal of the book is to explore the meaning of horsemanship in a dedicated way, grapple with why the word itself is so important, rather than the underlying concept. If it's the underlying concept that's important, explain.
- Idolizing George Morris without mentioning his preceding, public, and widespread allegations of sexual abuse of young men and boys in his stables. Even Maynard's own description of Morris' conduct (e.g., shouting "I have no respect for you! What have you done in the horse world?!" as though humans aren't inherently worthy of respect and the only source of respect is horse-world accomplishment) reinforced the sense that questionable behavior is a sign of grandeur. *Lesson:* Accept that writing a book for the public means taking a public stand. If you choose to ignore abuse allegations, that is a position in itself.
- Referring vaguely to making someone cry after a lesson, without on-page grappling with what it means to be a good trainer, coach, and mentor. This lesson doesn't seem to have been completely absorbed by the author yet. *Lesson:* Perhaps consider working with a sports psychologist or other professional who focuses on how to motivate students (e.g., tell them what to do, rather than what *not* to do).
- Incompletely recognizing privilege. While at one point he acknowledges the privilege of being the son of two horse trainers and "coming from Canada," he also claims that "luck is spelled w-o-r-k." While work is important, the author's privilege was such a huge part of the story -- his ability to take unpaid jobs for over a year, stay home without a job for months at a time, etc. -- that the lack of straightforward talk on this point, early on, seemed like a glaring omission. *Lesson:* It's ok to be privileged. Just acknowledge it, and don't try and undermine that acknowledgement by explaining away true, blessed, and delightful luck as "work." It's possible to have both.